Do the mods delete threads on a SP's request???

[joeblow]

A couple of weeks ago, I noticed the thread on an independant SP who called herself <**name removed**> had disappeared from the incall section of the board. As I recall, this thread had 3 reviews in it: the first one by the initiator of the thread was quite positive, the second review by myself was mixed and the third one was more on the negative side. In any event, as far as I can remember, there was nothing contentious or offensive about this thread...no catfights, name-calling, personal info, or suchlike. A few days ago, I asked the initiator of the thread if he had deleted his own thread and he answered no. He also explained that the SP had asked the mods to delete her thread. Apparently, they have complied with her request.

If this is actually what happened, I am asking the mods why they did this and what is their policy with respect to requests such as her's. More to the point, do SPs have veto rights about what is said of them on this board?

JB

 

[EagerBeaver]

Interesting.......

JB,

I do not recall the thread in question, but I will be very interested to see how the Mods respond to this inquiry. I accept your representation that you wrote an honest review and I would like to hear why the thread was deleted.

EB

 

[breadman]

this has nothing to do with moderators....

Joeblow, do you happen to recall who posted this glowing review?? You must have glanced at the name of either the guy who posted the review or the guy who posted the negative review. Either name will help....

Sounds to me like a shill.....positive post followed by two negatives. Then a deletion of the negative press to keep business from drying up. My guess is you find out the name of the original poster, you'll find a shill trying to draw up some extra business.

 

[picaron]

I've seen a few threads dissapear myself, never thought much about it though.

 

[Fred Zed]

If this is actually what happened, I am asking the mods why they did this and what is their policy with respect to requests such as <<name removed>>. More to the point, do SPs have veto rights about what is said of them on this board?

JB

The answer is YES on these conditions:
-Both GOOD and BAD Reviews are to be deleted
- The SP is not a RIPOFF, Scam artist
I would add that the same policy applies across all our sites.

It does not matter whether the SP is an advertiser or not.

Usually, providers who don't want reviews will have that clearly stated at their website. Hence, a reponsible hobbyist should respect the SP's request particularly if she has taken the trouble to post it at her site.

 

[Lawless]

Owners of the business!

All of us should remember that this board is a business and who is bringing in the moneys!
Our only contrubution is keeping the board up to date with reviews and comments!
Then you have your answer!
Once you accept that, no problem with the owners protecting their business!
Tha's life after all!

 

[EagerBeaver]

No Review Policy

So I am to understand that the SP in question had a no review policy which Joe Blow and some others failed to heed.

Sounds like some very serious miscommunication issues between Joe Blow and the SP and the other guys who reviewed her.

 

[Fred Zed]

Once you accept that, no problem with the owners protecting their business!
Tha's life after all!

If you check my comments above I said that the policy applies to advertisers and non advertisers alike. The SP being discussed here is not a MERB advertiser. Since it is unlikely that we would comply with a request from
a rip- off SP to delete reviews MERB members are still protected.
If a SP clearly states at her website ( or during the encounter ) that she would prefer not to be reviewed I think the client should respect that.

 

[joeblow]

>breadman

I don`t think the thread starter is a shill. I think he is a bona fide hobbyist who simply had a good time.

>EB

Some additional bits of information you need to get the picture: my policy is to not identify myself a member of MERB when I see SPs and to not even broach the subject of review boards during a session. The times I have been asked by SPs about review boards, I pretend I am a lurker. The one time I was expressely asked by an SP not to do a review, I complied (too bad, she remains my ATF...Astrid of Toronto, now retired) Last, to repeat, my review of this SP was mixed: I found her attractive and friendly, my critique was on a particular aspect of her service, I have no bone to pick with her and wish her the best in life. For all these reasons, it is highly unlikely that she asked me not to review her and that I did anyhow.

See for instance: https://merb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=20765&highlight=cramp+style#post20765

>FredZed

My session with this SP was in August. The first reviewer, to my recollection, started the thread just prior to my session. After my review, she started posting chit-chat in her own thread from August through September, thus bumping her name to the top of the incall section from time to time. I therefore gather she was not unhappy about her being reviewed on MERB...until the third reviewer came along, in October I think, and said he did not find her as attractive as I did. There was nothing derogatory in his post to my recollection, he simply disagreed with my taste. Some time after this third review, which was the actually the first to be clearly negative, I noticed the thread had disappeared.

So Fred, I did not violate an SPs request not to be reviewed. I am raising this issue because I don`t like to waste my time contributing to the community only to have a review erased, I haven`t seen you or the mods state up till now that you give veto rights to SPs over what is said of them and I question your judgement in complying with this SPs request to delete her thread when it otherwise conformed to the stated posting guidelines of this board.

JB

 

[EagerBeaver]

Important Issue

Fred,

In light of this clarifying post by Joe Blow an important issue has been raised.

I can understand an SP having a "no review" policy and MERB wanting to respect that by deleting reviews posted in violation of that policy.

However, if as indicated by JB the SP voluntarily uses the Board and accepts favorable reviews, and only exercises her veto rights after a bad review has been posted, then we have a problem.

MERB cannot allow veto rights to be exercised under these circumstances. There is no point in MERB continuing to exist if an SP is permitted to have a bunch of reviews deleted when someone posts a less than stellar review. If this is how MERB chooses to operate, it will come to be viewed as little more than a marketing tool for the SPs who pay it, as opposed to a forum for credible reviews.

 

[agentleman27]

I'd like to suggest that the list of SPs asking for no-review should be published. SPs might have the right to confidentiality but publishing their names would certainly be a nice tool for us.

A27

 

[survivor]

Review board

This is an escort review board. So there will be of course good and bad reviews. This is the purpose of a review board. We can't just post good reviews and let SP veto all the negative reviews, then what is the point to have a review board? I agree that if a SP clearly state or tell you not to write a review, then that is fine with me. But with what I have read in this thread, especially Joe's post, I have to agree with CaptRenault........ it seems that the SP in question used her veto only after a bad review has been written. If that is the case, it wasn't justify to delete the old reviews of that SP (good and bad)

Please clarify the "no review" rules. Up to now, I didn't know that SP had the power of veto on this board.

 

[Robin]

I think agentleman27's idea is best. If merb maintains a list of SPs who do not want reviews, their customers could avoid posting reviews (good or bad) on this board. I'm sure it is disconcerting to a hobbyist to find his review disappear from the archives at the SP's request. Such a list would help me since I happen to be a hobbyist with an "always-review" policy and I wouldn't knowingly call an escort who bars reviews. I have been surprised by a couple of escorts who barred me from future appointments after the fact because of my reviews, but those are sacrifices I had to make.

 

[survivor]

Gentleman

Gentleman,

I think you posted in the wrong thread.

 

[Fred Zed]

I didn't see the thread in question but did catch the name of the SP. For what its worth, I did she her posting on another board (no, not that one) which also contained a review of her there. Whether she asks them to remove that one too, I don't know. Take care.

That's possible. I know a few SPs who ask Canadian based boards to remove their posts and yet they will let the reviews stand on US based boards. That I find to be a contradiction. If a SP has a no review policy that should apply to all the boards.

I think everyone is making some very constructive obsevations. To be honest, I find the N R P to be one of the harder policies to enforce on the boards. However, I also think this can be achieved without diminishing the value of the board to the hobbyist. I agree that a list of non reviewable Sps would be a good start.

 

[spartacus]

Spartacus wades in

I also think that a list of escorts who did not want reviews would be best.
or even an addition to the spreadsheet of DNR

I think re taking out postings or reviews .
if the escort requests to the board that she does not want reviews posted at all, then that is ok.
but if as mentioned above she contributed to the thread after the first review then all should remain.
It is not right to ask that all reviews be taken out only once bad reviews are written.

Also re reviews being pulled and entire threads going away.
to the mods is there no way to keep the thread without the starter?
it would be a shame to lose the luxure mega thread because mitch 69 quit.

Spartacus.

 

[Mod 2]

Posts/Threads removal policies

Sorry guys, but I disagree with some of you about the "no review" policy.

MERB believes that members of the community deserve basic respect. Given this, the post removal policy is simple, and applies BOTH to merb members (clients) and service providers or agencies...

MERB members

1) All MERB members are in complete control of their posts, and whether a member has been banned or not is irrelevant. Upon request by PM or from a VERIFIED email allowing us to make sure the person is really who he/she claims he/she is (the email registered in the MERB profile), we will remove all of his/her posts. We still reserve the right to verify the request before taking action on it.

2) Post removal requests are considered high-priority, but may take a short while if we are busy with other things, since we are just volunteers. You can expect your request to be fulfilled as soon as humanly possible.

3) We do NOT remove all of a member's posts upon banishment. Since banishment is a potentially reversible action, we don't want to do anything irreversible UNLESS IT'S REQUESTED by the member (above).

4) With previous versions of vBulletin, deletion of a board member would automatically result in all of his/her posts to be deleted. This is not true anymore. Again, it has to be specifically requested.

Service providers / agencies

We consider that ANY SP has the right to ask for removal of posts about her, as long as it does not affect the objectivity of the board. We consider this board as being a service to the "hobbying community", but the service providers have the right to decide whether they want to be reviewed here or not.

5) The same kind of identity verification is done to Service Providers, to make sure he/she is who he/she claims he/she is. We will take requests from published emails or PMs from SPs registered with their published email address.

6) We do NOT delete single posts. If requested, ALL posts / threads / reviews regarding a service provider are to be removed. We will do our best to search and identify all related posts, good AND bad, to remove them ALL.

7) From now on (new policy), we will post a list of the service providers who requested to have information about them deleted.

We do not have control over what is happening on other review boards, and as such, it is quite possible reviews or information about a service provider still exist somewhere else while he/she's asking us to delete all information here. Please understand that not all review boards have the same policies, but we believe everyone has the fundamental right to have a public presence - or not - on boards like this one.

By the way, in light of the recent events on this board, we are currently in the process of revising the rules, to hopefully encompass all grey areas.

Thank you for reading

M2

 

[joeblow]

I just stumbled upon a THIRD review board catering to the Montreal hobbying community. I mention this because the SP I named in my initial post in this thread seems to be playing an active role in this new board. (To drum up posts and traffic on the new board, she is offering a free one-hour session to the winner of a draw.) I can therefore only surmize she chose to limit her exposure to good and especially bad reviews to a forum she appears to be associated with, and perhaps controls to some extent.

I also noticed that her only review on that board is by -- you guessed it -- the member who initiated her thread here with a positive review.

In light of this development, perhaps MOD2 is being a bit too indulgent to the supply side of this community when he writes:

"We consider that ANY SP has the right to ask for removal of posts about her, as long as it does not affect the objectivity of the board. We consider this board as being a service to the "hobbying community", but the service providers have the right to decide whether they want to be reviewed here or not."

What this amounts to, is that SPs will accept to be reviewed here as long as the reviews are favourable. When a negative one comes along, they will just pull the plug and move along to another board.

JB -- Consumer Activist

 

[EagerBeaver]

I Agree

I agree with Joe Blow.

The problem with having multiple Boards like MERB, MERC and whatever this new Board is, is that the SPs can now use the competition between the Boards to leverage advertising and control reviews. In the past when MERB was the only kid on the block this could not happen, as the SPs had to take what they can get by way of reviews.

Now the Boards are pandering to SPs. One can't help but get that feeling. I agree with JB that the multiplicity of Boards is not in the best interest of the hobbyist. We must band together now and make sure these Boards are not letting the tail wag the dog. The Boards either exist for us or they are mere marketing tools for the SPs who pay them, with no regard for truth or veracity in the assessment of the SP's services.

May I suggest that we can regain control of this situation by refusing to do business with SPs with a "no review" policy.

 

[Mod 2]

In light of this development, perhaps MOD2 is being a bit too indulgent to the supply side of this community when he writes:

"We consider that ANY SP has the right to ask for removal of posts about her, as long as it does not affect the objectivity of the board. We consider this board as being a service to the "hobbying community", but the service providers have the right to decide whether they want to be reviewed here or not."

What this amounts to, is that SPs will accept to be reviewed here as long as the reviews are favourable. When a negative one comes along, they will just pull the plug and move along to another board.

JB, Please read the above policies again. If the SP requires her reviews to be removed, whether it's after a bad review or at any point in time, the result will be the same: Not only the bad review but ALL OF HER REVIEWS will be deleted, good and bad, and since we will post about the request for removal, you will still have an indication.

As I said, "we believe everyone has the fundamental right to have a public presence - or not - on boards like this one". We can not control other boards, but we strive to remain as respectful as possible on this one, while still maintaining objective information.

M2